Mumbai Court July 1984 Judgments
First Income-tax Officer Vs. French Dyes and Chemicals (i) (P.)
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-31-1984
Reported in: (1984)10ITD240(Mum.)
1. All the appeals except the last two are by the department. The common point in dispute in all these appeals relates to the allowability of certain amounts claimed by the assessee under the head 'Sales Promotion Expenses' and stated to represent secret commission incurred in connection with its business. Except for the last two assessment years where the appeals of the assessee are before us, the Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the assessee's claim of secret commission. For the last two years, the claim not being allowed by the Commissioner (Appeals), the assessee has come up on appeal. For the assessment year 1975-76, the department has challenged four other points and for the assessment year 1976-77, three points. These are dealt with first and the common point relating to the secret commission is dealt with in the later part of this order.2. The assessee sold a flat during the year along with a garage at Hill Park. Long-term capital gains of Rs. 1,11,500 were returned. The ITO ref...
Tag this Judgment!Madhu Vs. the Commissioner of Police, Thane and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-31-1984
Reported in: 1986(2)BomCR365
Shah, J.1. In these two petitions under Art. 226 of the Constitution one filed by the detenu Madhu @ Mahadu Mangel Tare and the other by the detenu Prakash @ Pakya Dharamji Kalyankar seek to challenge the orders of detention issued against them under S. 2 and S. 3 of the National Security Act, 1980 (for brevity called 'the Act').2. A common question of law as to the interpretation of the provisions of the National Security Act (2nd Amendment) Ordinance No. 6 of 1984 whereby the said Act is amended, arises in both these petitions. It would, therefore, be convenient to dispose of these two petitions by a common judgment. Before we proceed to consider the provisions of the said Ordinance it would be necessary to state the facts relating to the two petitions before us. Before we take up for consideration the provisions incorporated in the Ordinance we would prefer to deal with the submissions which are unrelated to the Ordinance first.Criminal Writ Petition No. 112 of 1984 :3. In this peti...
Tag this Judgment!Dharamsi Morarji Chemicals Co. Ltd. Vs. N.G. Desai, the Regional Provi ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-31-1984
Reported in: (1984)86BOMLR458; [1984(49)FLR446]; (1985)ILLJ433Bom; 1984MhLJ780
1. The petitioners are a public limited company (hereinafter 'the Company') in existence since about the year 1921. It had then established a factory at Ambernath, District Thane (hereinafter 'the Ambarnath factory.') This factory manufactures heavy inorganic chemicals and fertilisers, but predominantly fertilisers. Several years thereafter the Company established on 9th July, 1977 another new factory at Roha. District Kolaba (hereinafter 'the Roha Factory') for the manufacture of certain organic chemicals which are not manufactured at the Ambarnath factory.2. Under S. 16(1)(b) of the Employees' Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter 'the Act'), the provisions of the Act were not applicable to the Roha factory for a period of three years, that is 9th July, 1980. However, pursuant to a request of the employees of the Roha factory, the petitioners agreed to make a representation to the 1st respondent for reducing this exemption or infancy period from three yea...
Tag this Judgment!Timki @ Kishan Natharmal Mirchandani Vs. M.V. Chitalay, Assistant Comm ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-31-1984
Reported in: 1984(2)BomCR680
V.A. Mohta, J.1. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner-detenu has challenged the order of externment dated 23rd January, 1984 passed in pursuance of notice under sections 56 and 59 of the Bombay Police Act, dated 20th October, 1983, containing the following allegations :'(a) that since 1979 in the locality or those area, you are engaged in the commission of offences of robberies by extorting money at the point of knife, which offences fall under Chapters X, XVI and XVII of the Indian Penal Code.(b) that since 1979 you are engaged in the commission of offences of assaults on residents and/or shop keepers of that locality or those areas which offences fall under Chapters XVI and XVII of the Indian Penal Code.'2. The principal contention of Smt. Desai, the learned Counsel for the petitioner, is that the very notice is bad in law being blissfully vague. We see considerable merit in this submission. It is true that in such notices mentioning of ...
Tag this Judgment!Oriental Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd. and Vs. Ratnabai Balu Kad ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-31-1984
Reported in: 2(1985)ACC422
Sawant, J.1. These two appeals have been heard and disposed of together by a common judgment as they arise out of the same accident and the same judgment and order dated the 7th February 1980 of the Motor Accidents claims Tribunal, Sangli. The short facts of the case are as follows:2. On the 8th June 1978 a motor truck bearing No. MHL 4258 was crossing an unmanned gate which was in between Salgare and Belanki Railway Stations. One passenger train was coming from Salgare towards Belanki Railway Station on its way to Miraj. The truck crossing the unmanned gate and the said passenger train collided on the railway tracks and a considerable damage was caused to the body of the truck Balu Kadam, who was the cleaner on the said truck was seriously injured in the said accident and he breathed his last on his way to Miraj where he was taken for treatment. His widow and minor son therefore filed the present claims for compensation before the Motor Accidents claims Tribunal, Sangli. To the applic...
Tag this Judgment!Sandvik Asia Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-30-1984
Reported in: (1985)14ITD35(Mum.)
1. This is the assessee's appeal preferred against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). Though the assessee has raised as many as 22 grounds, in fact there are only three grounds as under: 2. That the assessee challenges the validity and legality of the assessment. 3. Disallowance of surtax liability and the expenses disallowed under Section 40A(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act').2. The assessee-company manufactures various tungsten carbide products such as tips, dyes, nibs, drill steels, cutters, etc. The assessee-company follows previous year ending 31st December as accounting year.In the profit and loss account for the year under consideration, note 18 is relevant in which it was mentioned that last in first out method (LIFO) was adopted for computing direct cost and that on the basis of method which was used in the earlier years the cost as on 31-12-1975 was Rs. 48,659,804.It was the assessee's contention that because of the rising prices the assessee found it proper t...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Toshniwal Brothers Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-30-1984
Reported in: [1984]57STC198a(Bom)
Shah, J.1. These six references are under section 61(1) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Sales Tax Reference No. 20 of 1978 has been referred to us at the instance of the Revenue and the remaining five references have been made at the instance of the assessee. The parties to these references are the same and the material facts, which have given rise to these references and which are necessary for answering the questions referred to us, are also the same.2. Sales Tax Reference No. 4 of 1984 relates to the period of assessment from 1st January, 1961, to 31st December, 1961. Sales Tax Reference No. 5 of 1984 relates to the period of assessment from 1st January, 1962, to 31st December, 1962. Sales Tax Reference No. 7 of 1984 as well as Sales Tax Reference No. 20 of 1978 relate to the period of assessment from 1st January, 1963, to 31st December, 1963. Sales Tax Reference No. 8 of 1984 relates to period of assessment from 1st January, 1964, to 31st D...
Tag this Judgment!Abhay L. Khatau (Huf) Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-28-1984
Reported in: (1984)10ITD863(Mum.)
1. This is an appeal by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner passed under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), whereby the ITO has been directed to recover the interest wrongly allowed to the assessee under Sections 214 and 244(1A) of the Act while giving effect to the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). The assessee is a HUF. The proceedings relate to its assessment for the assessment year 1974-75. The assessment was originally completed on 20-9-1977 determining the total income at Rs. 2,87,360. The assessment was revised under Section 155 as well as under Section 154 of the Act.However, this is not relevant for the purpose of this appeal. The Commissioner (Appeals) decided the assessee's appeal by his order dated 18-3-1980. The effect was given to the appellate order of the Commissioner (Appeals) by the ITO vide his order dated 31-3-1980. As a result of latter order of the ITO, the assessee's total income stands determined at Rs. 45,042 only. This has ...
Tag this Judgment!income-tax Officer Vs. Reno Chemicals, Pharmaceuticals
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-28-1984
Reported in: (1984)10ITD849(Mum.)
Where the tax is determined on a paper and not on the assessment order under section 143(3) the assessment was still a valid assessment as no form of assessment order has been prescribed.Assessment--DETERMINATION OF TAX--Form ITNS 150 showing determination of tax, not sent to the assessee with assessment order and demand notice.Where Form No. ITNS 150 showing determination of tax, was not sent to assessee with assessment order and demand notice, the same would not make assessment a invalid, but there would be a defect within the meaning of provisions of section 292B.Assessment--NON-COMPLIANCE WITH S. 144B--Fresh assessment whether can be directed.Where there is non-compliance with section 144B such assessment shall not be a nullity and appellate authority can direct fresh assessment.Where there is nothing wrong with the assumption of the initial jurisdiction but some irregularity, including non-compliance with some mandatory provisions had crept in, the assessment, no doubt, would hav...
Tag this Judgment!The Charity Commissioner, Maharashtra State, Bombay Vs. Rahandrasigh A ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-27-1984
Reported in: AIR1984Bom478; 1984MhLJ806
Qazi, J.1. The present Letters Patent Appeal arises out of the judgment in a. O. 26 of 1975 decided by the Single Judge of this court Palshikar J. as he then was, rejecting the prayerof the plaintiff-appellantfor appointment of a receover.2. The forcewhich gave rise to the present Letters Patent Appeal may be stated, in brief, as under:There is a public trust known awe 'Shri Balaji sansthan' Deulgaon Raja, in Buldana district. On 25-10-1961. The district Judge, Buldana, framed a scheme for administrationof the said trust. Under the scheme presentrespondent No. 1 was appointed as hereditarytrustee and also a Managing. Trustee as per the scheme and in accordance with the directions of the district Judge, Buldana, given to him form time to time. However, it appears that there were complaintsabout the management of the trust, which led to filing of a civil suit by the appellant charity Commissioner, under section ;50 of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, claiming the relief of removalof trustee...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »